Monthly Archives: April 2022

What happened to higher educations offshore boom? For over a decade, the sustained growth of international branch campuses seemed a sure thing. New York Universitys campus in Abu Dhabi welcomed its first class of undergraduates in 2010, setting the stage for major-league expansions by Yale University (in Singapore) and Duke University (in China). As of late 2020, researchers counted more than 300 branch campuses, close to half of which were run by universities in the United States or Britain. But a series of closures and high-profile withdrawals, most recently the National University of Singapores decision to pull the plug on its joint venture with Yale, suggest that the bloom is off the rose.

Was the romance of offshore education driven by improbable hype about untapped sources of abundant revenue? Did it run aground on the shoals of speech restrictions in illiberal societies? Or is cross-border education morphing into a new phase of existence, sparked by the pandemic experience of remote teaching? Theres some truth to each of those conjectures. The first two problems were easy enough to predict, and should have come as no surprise. The third is still unfolding, as universities feel their way out of the trauma inflicted by the coronavirus.

The rush to plant varsity flags in foreign soil dates to the early 2000s, when post-9/11 strictures on immigration prompted American and other Anglosphere colleges to open branches in locations more accessible to their international students. Generous subsidies from Persian Gulf states looking to burnish their nation-building efforts helped to grease the wheel, while the demand for overseas instruction and credentials in an emerging Chinese middle class drove a wave of joint ventures that saw China hosting more branch campuses than any other nation.

Industry boosters dangled rosy growth estimates, and college finance officers, hungry for revenue in the recessionary years following the 2007-8 financial crash, took the bait. Some institutions, especially those with frank aspirations to operate on a global scale, went all out on international branch campuses, or IBCs. But most held back, wary perhaps of diluting their brands or of risking reputational exposure from the likelihood of academic-freedom violations in the two hot IBC zones of East Asia and the Persian Gulf.

We might have expected another round of branch-campus expansionism under the Trump administration, when new immigration restrictions prevented many would-be students from traveling to the United States. But those constraints were accompanied by his administrations sharp withdrawal from international policy and diplomacy, if not trade itself. The version of neoliberal globalization engendered by the corporation-friendly World Trade Organization was already in decline, but Trumps America First zeal accelerated the shift toward a new nationalist mind-set, propelled in many countries by the forces of authoritarian populism. Cross-border collaboration was no longer so certain, and with the Washington Consensus of worldwide economic liberalization receding in the rear-view mirror, college administrators were less sanguine about committing resources to offshore sites.

At the same time, faculty members began to find their voices. At most institutions, the IBC gold rush was wholly a result of executive decisions, with minimal consultation of professors. When it became clear that universities could not safeguard branch-campus academic freedoms, faculty members at some institutions pushed back against their administrations plans to set up shop in locations with zero record of respecting basic speech rights.

My own employers nervy decision to establish full-fledged NYU campuses in Abu Dhabi and Shanghai has yielded spotty results. The host governments generously bankrolled each site, allowing for a tenure-line faculty and well-supported student body on both campuses. But easily foreseeable problems quickly arose.

According to a 2021 Freedom House report, at least 10 faculty members have been denied entry to teach or conduct research at NYU Abu Dhabi, as have numerous students, staff members, and support personnel. In a milieu where any criticism of the royal familys governance structure can be construed as a crime, self-censorship among standing faculty members is a given. The exposure of abusive conditions for the migrant workers building NYUs Abu Dhabi campus further tarnished the brand. Despite earnest declarations by several Gulf countries that the kafala system of labor recruitment and monitoring has been reformed, if not dismantled, investigators who have been able to interview workers have found little evidence of improved conditions on the ground.

Frustration with the absence of effective reforms is mounting, especially in Qatar, where the approaching World Cup has rendered worker deaths an international scandal. In the meantime, the long reach of Abu Dhabi money has had a corrupting impact on NYUs home campus, with some departments amassing million-dollar treasuries of compensation for participating in instruction on the branch campus, while others end up cash-poor by comparison as a result of their reluctance to send faculty members to the Gulf.

Alex Williamson for The Chronicle

At NYU Shanghai, there is a pattern of selecting and rejecting faculty applications to teach based on who is likely to rock the boat, or inflame sensitivity around mainland politics, in ways that are unofficially, and euphemistically, rationalized as East-West cultural differences. One prominent colleague, the philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah, was denied a visa to speak on campus in 2015. Clouds gathered over the Shanghai campus when, beginning in 2013, Beijing issued a number of repressive decrees that have resulted in a general, long-term chill, exacerbated by the U.S. governments own ill-fated China Initiative. Branch-campus administrators who claim they are not affected by the Chinese Communist Partys speech directives are in the position, ironically, of boasting extraterritorial privileges, redolent of the colonial era, when Western powers operated by their own rules.

Another NYU site, in Tel Aviv, has been under pressure for different reasons. In 2011, Israel launched a well-funded campaign to entice American universities to start study-abroad programs there. The goal was to cement ties and improve Israels image while diverting attention from its repression of Palestinian universities and second-class treatment of Palestinian students. Yet in 2017 the Knesset amended Israeli law to prohibit entry to individuals on the basis of their political opinions. That condition is a clear violation of nondiscrimination policies on most American campuses.

Recognizing that NYU could not guarantee equal access to the Tel Aviv campus for all students and faculty members, my department passed a resolution of noncooperation with NYU Tel Aviv in 2019. It was followed, in 2021, by a similar universitywide pledge by the Faculty of Color for an Anti-Racist NYU and their allies.

Last month Israel passed a law depriving Palestinian universities of control over which international scholars, researchers, and students they can invite to their campuses. In a sweeping abrogation of academic freedom and autonomy, the Israeli military will now make those decisions. That new repressive regulation looks certain to further compromise the ethics of operating overseas programs in Israel.

For obvious reasons, the sharp limitations on travel and access during the pandemic have disrupted the overseas operations of universities. Budgets took a big hit, with no stimulus funds to mitigate the operating losses. Most institutions focused on survival at home, not growth overseas. Yet higher educations forced experiment with online instruction has altered many of our pedagogical norms, and some of those changes may be permanent. Although most educators are mourning the loss of in-the-flesh classroom contact, the ability to attend meetings and perform university business remotely has many advantages.

Our experience with remote instruction has also revived the dream of consumer distance education that captivated many university presidents during the dot-com era. At that time, administrators pumped sizable sums of money into the construction of cyber programs, signing delivery deals with corporations itching to move into the higher-ed sector. David F. Noble, the historian of technology, exposed many of those initiatives as efforts to cut instructional-labor costs and wrest control over curricula and intellectual property from faculty members, memorably labeling them digital diploma mills. The results delivered by that venture into internet education were almost as underwhelming as those of the correspondence-course movement of the early 20th century, and the investments were written off.

In the two decades since Nobles scathing assessment, online degrees have gained ground in some subject areas, whereas, in others, what we now call in person instruction has survived mostly intact. In the meantime, the bureaucratic life of universities has become almost wholly digitized. Now that the pandemic has brought a second lease of life to remote learning, ed-tech investors are newly aroused, their animal spirits, in John Maynard Keyness phrase, running high. The race to capture a more profitable version of Zoom University is on. For higher eds fiscal officers, one possible future may reside in the form of the discounted fee structure demanded by students during the pandemic. Faced with rising fees and crushing student debt, many households are likely to welcome the option of a cut-price Zoom education at a quality college.

As for the offshore sites, some colleges may decide they can forsake the steep cost of building and maintaining IBC facilities if overseas students are willing to pay to attend remote classes taught by faculty members at the more prestigious home campuses. The appeal of this financial arrangement should not be underestimated. Dot-com evangelists derided the Old Economy world of brick and mortar, but universities have been on a construction binge for the last 20 years, loading up on institutional debt to build ever more facilities. Meanwhile, outrage over student debt has bypassed the institutional side of the debt financing of higher education. As state funding decreased and as many colleges embarked on a growth mission, they turned to the financial markets, accepting the neofeudal authority of the credit-rating agencies, and racking up long-term debt obligations that have enriched Wall Street bond underwriters and further curtailed the autonomy of institutions.

The managers of fast-developing countries may decide that subsidizing a branch of a well-known American or British university is still a worthwhile investment for the national brand. In the absence of those contributions, however, debt-financing a campus in an illiberal country at a time of unraveling globalism is less and less attractive. More alluring by far is the prospect of ginning up revenue from overseas students willing to Zoom into class at inhospitable hours in hopes of earning a degree at the home campus. The economic logic behind that scenario is sound. But what about the educational consequences? And how should faculty members respond to the proposition?

While there are few obstacles to overseas students enrolling in online degree programs, the credential does not always carry the weight of a traditional degree. The Association of Indian Universities, for example, does not formally recognize foreign online degrees as equivalent to those earned in person at the same institution. Graduates may have trouble securing government jobs as a result. Many employers also take a skeptical view of the diminished educational experience offered by the programs.

For teachers convinced of the superiority of face-to-face instruction from the charismatic performance of the lecture hall to the hands-on tutelage of the lab practicum or the Socratic method of the small seminar the evidence for such negative judgments is unassailable. But the second-string quality of learning is not the only drawback of remote education. The potential for losing control over content, syllabi, and other course material is more alarming than it was 20 years ago, when Noble first aired concerns about universities asserting the full suite of employers intellectual-property rights.

So, too, is the opportunity for stepped-up surveillance by administrators and censorship by third-party providers. In 2020, for example, Zoom ignited a firestorm of criticism for shutting down a San Francisco State University webinar featuring the militant Palestinian activist Leila Khaled, and then canceling several other university-run webinars that did not include Khaled but criticized the companys action. International students have good reason to worry that certain classroom comments, uncontroversial by Western norms, might land them in trouble in their home countries.

At most institutions, the genteel fabric of academic custom is all that stands in the way of those property grabs and speech retrenchments. Most faculty members sat out the debate over the first IBC wave, but we have all been through the wringer of Zoom-induced alienation. We should have more to say this time around especially if offshore goes online.

Read this article:

Is the Offshore-Campus Boom Over? - The Chronicle of Higher Education

North Carolina officials led by Gov. Roy Cooper are at an offshore wind conference in Atlantic City, New Jersey, this week promoting the state as a base for offshore wind development.

Cooper said Thursday that officials from his office, along with the state commerce department and ports authority, have met with potential partners at the Offshore Wind Partnering Forum.

In a keynote address, Cooper said a study last year suggested North Carolina can win a major share of the estimated $140 billion in spending and 85,000 jobs expected to come with offshore wind development on the East Coast.

"Offshore wind is here, and it's coming hard in the U.S., and North Carolina will play a leadership role in clean energy development and for manufacturing for decades to come that I guarantee you," Cooper said.

State officials believe ports at Wilmington and Morehead City can play major roles. And Cooper said North Carolina has "the predictability and supportive environment" that wind industry suppliers are looking for.

One wind project is in the planning stages off Kitty Hawk. Federal officials will hold an auction for additional wind farm leases off Wilmington on May 11.

Continue reading here:

Could North Carolina be a hub for offshore wind development? Gov. Roy Cooper thinks so - WFAE

The three discoveries are southeast of the Liza and Payara developments and bring to five the discoveries made by ExxonMobil in Guyana in 2022.

The Barreleye-1 well encountered approximately 230 feet (70 meters) of hydrocarbon-bearing sandstone and was drilled in 3,840 feet (1,170 meters) of water. Drilling at Patwa-1 encountered 108 feet (33 meters) of hydrocarbon-bearing sandstone and was conducted in 6,315 feet (1,925 meters) of water. The Lukanani-1 well encountered 115 feet (35 meters) of hydrocarbon-bearing sandstone and was drilled in a water depth of 4,068 feet (1,240 meters). Operations are ongoing at Barreleye-1 and Lukanani-1.

These discoveries and the updated resource estimate increase the confidence we have in our ambitious exploration strategy for the Stabroek Block and will help to inform our future development plans for the southeast part of the block, said Liam Mallon, president of ExxonMobil Upstream Company. ExxonMobil remains committed to delivering value at an accelerated pace to the people of Guyana, our partners and shareholders and reliably supplying affordable energy to meet increasing demand around the world.

ExxonMobil currently has four sanctioned projects offshore Guyana. Liza Phase 1 is producing approximately 130,000 barrels per day using the Liza Destiny floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) vessel. Liza Phase 2, which started production in February, is steadily ramping up to its capacity of 220,000 barrels per day using the Liza Unity FPSO. The third project, Payara, is expected to produce 220,000 barrels per day; construction on its production vessel, the Prosperity FPSO, is running approximately five months ahead of schedule with start-up likely before year-end 2023.The fourth project, Yellowtail, is expected to produce 250,000 barrels per day when the ONE GUYANA FPSO comes online in 2025.

Guyanas Stabroek Block is 6.6 million acres (26,800 square kilometers). ExxonMobil affiliate Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited is the operator and holds 45% interest in the Block. Hess Guyana Exploration Ltd. holds 30% interest, and CNOOC Petroleum Guyana Limited holds 25% interest.

###

About ExxonMobil

ExxonMobil, one of the largest publicly traded international energy and petrochemical companies, creates solutions that improve quality of life and meet societys evolving needs.

The corporations primary businesses - Upstream, Product Solutions and Low Carbon Solutions - provide products that enable modern life, including energy, chemicals, lubricants, and lower-emissions technologies. ExxonMobil holds an industry-leading portfolio of resources, and is one of the largest integrated fuels, lubricants and chemical companies in the world. To learn more, visit exxonmobil.com and the Energy Factor.

Follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Cautionary Statement

Statements of future events or conditions in this release are forward-looking statements. Actual future results, including project plans, schedules, capacities, production rates, and resource recoveries could differ materially due to: changes in market conditions affecting the oil and gas industry or long-term oil and gas price levels; political or regulatory developments including obtaining necessary regulatory permits; reservoir performance; the outcome of future exploration efforts; timely completion of development and construction projects; technical or operating factors; the outcome of commercial negotiations; unexpected technological breakthroughs or challenges; and other factors cited under the caption Factors Affecting Future Results on the Investors page of our website at exxonmobil.com and under Item 1A. Risk Factors in our annual report on Form 10-K. References to recoverable resources, oil-equivalent barrels, and other quantifies of oil and gas include estimated quantities that are not yet classified as proved reserves under SEC definitions but are expected to be ultimately recoverable. The term project can refer to a variety of different activities and does not necessarily have the same meaning as in any government payment transparency reports.

See the original post here:

ExxonMobil makes three new discoveries offshore Guyana, increases Stabroek resource estimate to nearly 11 billion barrels - ExxonMobil

Heerema Marine Contractors will deploy Sleipnir, the worlds largest crane vessel, on the 450 MW Neart na Gaoithe wind farm offshore Scotland in the coming weeks.

Sleipnir, together with Wagenborgs barge, Wagenborg 7, and two tugs, Pacific Discovery and Multratug 3, will be in charge of transporting and installing the wind farms two offshore substations, including the three-legged jacket foundations and the topsides.

The work is due to begin on 12 May at the earliest, Neart na Gaoithe Offshore Wind Farm Limited (NnGOWL) said.

The offshore substation jackets will be brought to the site and installed by Sleipnir. Once the jackets are secured in location, the South OSS topside will be installed by Sleipnir. The North OSS topside is to be installed at a later date.

The South OSS topside will be brought to the site using Wagenborg 7 and the two tugs.

It is anticipated that the installation of the jacket foundations will be completed by the end of May, weather dependent. This will be followed by the installation of the South OSS topside.

The commissioning of the substation is due to begin in early June and will continue throughout the Summer of 2022.

Jointly owned by EDF Renewables and ESB and under construction 15 kilometres off the coast of Fife,Neart na Gaoithewill comprise 54 Siemens Gamesa 8 MW wind turbines.

The 450 MW wind farm is scheduled to be fully commissioned in 2024.

Follow offshoreWIND.biz on:

Here is the original post:

Sleipnir to Install Neart na Gaoithe Offshore Substations - Offshore WIND

For years, the United Kingdom has been the world leader in harnessing offshore wind power. Burly wind turbines poking out of the Thames estuary, the North Sea and the Irish Sea now produce more than 10 gigawatts of power enough to meet 10% of Britains electricity needs. And theres more to come. In March, Prime Minister Boris Johnson promised to triple the nations offshore wind-generating power to 40 gigawatts by 2030, with plans for 100 gigawatts by 2050.

But Johnson is losing his early lead. Spurred by growing electricity demand and the need to reduce its lethal pollution levels, the Peoples Republic last year installed 17 gigawatts of new offshore wind power more capacity than the whole world had produced in the previous five years. This expansion lifts Chinas offshore energy capacity to 26 gigawatts, nearly half of the global total of 54 gigawatts.

These gains followed a commissioning rush of sustainable power projects motivated partly by Chinas hosting of the 2022 Winter Olympics, which were purported to be run on 100% renewable energy. Previously, China had failed to meet a bold 2012 goal of building 30 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2020.

Although offshore wind is now 30 years old, it still accounts for less than 1% of world energy production. Development has been slow because of perceived high risks, steep up-front costs and evolving environmental regulations. In China, officials have also had to overcome production-quality issues, connectivity problems and grid-capacity shortages.

Compared to the U.S. northeast coast, Canada has access to a much larger offshore area with stronger wind speeds.

They persevered, because Chinas electricity demand grew another 10% in 2021, and the country still depends on coal for two-thirds of its electricity. China ranks 11th on the World Health Organizations list of nations with the worst air quality.

Happily, the International Energy Agency (IEA) reports that the potential for growth in offshore wind is near limitless. Improved technology and steep cost reductions are putting more and more of that potential within our reach. In 2019, the IEA estimated that offshore wind could generate 11 times more electricity than the world needs a whopping 420,000 terawatt-hours of electricity per year. (But then, the same report predicted that China would require six years to overtake Britain as the worlds largest producer of offshore wind power.)

When news of Chinas building boom leaked out, Sustainability Magazine called it an impressive feat that demonstrates just how underutilized offshore wind power is. While the U.S. lags behind, it has targeted 30 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2030, gunning for 110 gigawatts by 2050.

Its not too late for Canada to get in on the action. In January, Toronto climate consultant Martin Bush proposed that Ontario replace its aging nuclear reactors with offshore wind farms in Atlantic Canada, with the help of upgraded transmission lines linking Atlantic Canada with Ontario.

As Bush noted, Compared to the U.S. northeast coast, Canada has access to a much larger offshore area with stronger wind speeds.

Link:

China looks to overtake the UK as world leader in offshore wind power - Corporate Knights Magazine

I have read many articles on the rsted wind project offshore the Delaware beaches. And every time I see an article, the same questions scream at me: Why does Maryland have the rights to award contracts off the Delaware shoreline? Why does Delaware not have the rights to determine the use of its own offshore waters?

I understand offshore areas were determined by the federal government, but those states that border the areas should benefit from any projects off their own shores. No matter what your feelings are on wind energy and wind turbines off Delaware beaches, don't you think Delaware, its elected officials and its citizens should have that decision?

Maryland has plenty of its own shoreline, but is contracting to place the wind turbines in full view off Delaware and benefiting from the electricity and fees generated. Maryland should place them off Ocean City or some other Maryland shoreline and generate electricity from there. If Delaware citizens and tourists must look at the altered view, then Delaware should benefit from the electricity and fees generated, not Maryland.

See the original post:

Delaware should have offshore wind rights off its coast - CapeGazette.com

UK-based renewable investment firm Octopus Renewables Infrastructure Trust (ORIT) has agreed to acquire a 7.75% stake in the Lincs offshore wind farm.

With an installed capacity of 270MW, Lincs is located offshore from Englands east coast and has been operational since 2013.

Covering a 35km area, the offshore wind facility is equipped with 75 wind turbines, each with 3.6MW of capacity. It is operated and managed by Danish energy company rsted.

The facility benefits from the UKs renewable obligation certificate (ROC) scheme, receiving two ROCs for each MWh of energy it generates in its first 20 years.

The deal is expected to close in the second quarter of this year subject to the receipt of consent from existing investors and lenders.

Upon completion,Lincswill represent almost 10% of ORITs portfolio on a gross asset valuebasis.

ORIT chairman Phil Austin said: Our investment intoLincsis ORITs first into an operational offshore wind farm, and will provide us with an additional revenue-generating asset that benefits from the favourable renewable obligation certificate (ROC) subsidy regime and gives ORIT further portfolio diversification.

The acquisition will also strengthen ORITs relationships with leading investors and operators in the offshore sector.

ORIT is managed by Octopus Energys sister company, Octopus Renewables.

Octopus Energy acquired Octopus Renewables last July, having announced plans to acquire the company earlier in the year.

In December last year, Canadian investment company CPP Investments announced a $300m equity investment in Octopus Energy under a long-term strategic partnership.

The investment was intended to support Octopus Energys global expansion plan and made by CPP Investments Sustainable Energies Group.

Octopus said it planned to use the funding to improve its Kraken technology platform, which was created to support its own retail, generation and flexibility businesses.

Innovative Surface Modification for Enhanced Heat Transfer Solutions

Vacuum Pumps and Compressors for Vapour Recovery, Gas Processing and Pipeline Drying

View original post here:

ORIT to acquire stake in 270MW Lincs offshore wind farm in UK - Power Technology

Works on the construction of the Yunlin offshore wind farm in Taiwan have now resumed, following a winter break, with monopile installation starting up again.

As reported earlier this month, National Petroleum Construction Company (NPCC) will install the remaining monopiles on the offshore wind farm, replacing Sapura Energy which abandoned the project earlier this year, citing delays in the execution as the main reason.

NPCC will deploy its flagship offshore installation vessel DLS 4200 on the project which, according to the vessels AIS data, left Abu Dhabi late last night (28 April).

Yunneng Wind Power, the owner and developer of the 640 MW project, has also hired Havfram for Project Management and Owners Engineer Services within the foundation installation package.

While the monopile installation is set to restart and Boskalis already commenced with scour protection and subsea works, Jumbo is also getting ready to continue the installation of the transition pieces soon.

The projects wind turbine supplier Siemens Gamesa and cable installation contractor Seaway 7 are also preparing to start their respective construction campaigns at the project site in the Taiwan Strait, some eight kilometres west of the coast of Yunlin County.

During the winter break Yunneng focused their efforts on completing the remainder of the installation campaign taking into account many challenges encountered which were overcome through the efforts of all parties concerned. This has led to Yunnengs confidence of seeing steady progress in 2022, said Yunnengs chairperson Yuni Wang. Thanks to our project management team and our reliable partners, we will successfully bring the Yunlin project towards completion.

The Yunlin wind farm, which will comprise 80Siemens Gamesa 8 MW wind turbines, is owned by wpd (25 per cent), TotalEnergies (23 per cent), EGCO Group (25 per cent), and a Sojitz Corp-led consortium (27 per cent) which also includes Chugoku Electric Power, Chudenko Corporation, Shikoku Electric Power, and JXTG Nippon Oil & Energy Corporation.

Follow offshoreWIND.biz on:

Go here to read the rest:

Construction on Yunlin Offshore Wind Farm Resumes - Offshore WIND

Despite the fact that SBM Offshore N.V.'s (AMS:SBMO) value has dropped 4.0% in the last week insiders who sold US$1.1m worth of stock in the past 12 months have had less success. Insiders might have been better off holding onto their shares, given that the average selling price of US$13.36 is still below the current share price.

Although we don't think shareholders should simply follow insider transactions, we do think it is perfectly logical to keep tabs on what insiders are doing.

See our latest analysis for SBM Offshore

In the last twelve months, the biggest single sale by an insider was when the Chairman of Management Board & CEO, Bruno Y. Chabas, sold 684k worth of shares at a price of 13.36 per share. That means that even when the share price was below the current price of 13.74, an insider wanted to cash in some shares. When an insider sells below the current price, it suggests that they considered that lower price to be fair. That makes us wonder what they think of the (higher) recent valuation. However, while insider selling is sometimes discouraging, it's only a weak signal. We note that the biggest single sale was only 3.9% of Bruno Y. Chabas's holding.

In the last year SBM Offshore insiders didn't buy any company stock. The chart below shows insider transactions (by companies and individuals) over the last year. If you click on the chart, you can see all the individual transactions, including the share price, individual, and the date!

If you like to buy stocks that insiders are buying, rather than selling, then you might just love this free list of companies. (Hint: insiders have been buying them).

Looking at the total insider shareholdings in a company can help to inform your view of whether they are well aligned with common shareholders. Usually, the higher the insider ownership, the more likely it is that insiders will be incentivised to build the company for the long term. It appears that SBM Offshore insiders own 1.4% of the company, worth about 35m. This level of insider ownership is good but just short of being particularly stand-out. It certainly does suggest a reasonable degree of alignment.

It doesn't really mean much that no insider has traded SBM Offshore shares in the last quarter. Still, the insider transactions at SBM Offshore in the last 12 months are not very heartening. The modest level of insider ownership is, at least, some comfort. While we like knowing what's going on with the insider's ownership and transactions, we make sure to also consider what risks are facing a stock before making any investment decision. Every company has risks, and we've spotted 2 warning signs for SBM Offshore (of which 1 shouldn't be ignored!) you should know about.

Of course SBM Offshore may not be the best stock to buy. So you may wish to see this free collection of high quality companies.

For the purposes of this article, insiders are those individuals who report their transactions to the relevant regulatory body. We currently account for open market transactions and private dispositions, but not derivative transactions.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

Originally posted here:

Insiders who sold SBM Offshore N.V.'s (AMS:SBMO) earlier year may find some solace in the 4.0% drop - Simply Wall St

US-based WINDEA CTV LLC has started construction of its first three 30-metre hybrid-ready crew transfer vessels (CTVs) for the emerging US offshore wind market.

Two of the Incat Crowther-designed CTVs will be constructed at St. Johns Shipyard in Palatka, Florida and one will be built at Gulf Craft in Franklin, Louisiana.

The CTVs are scheduled to be delivered in 2023 and will go immediately into service for GE Renewables.

The vessels will first operate out of New Bedford, MA, during the Vineyard Wind I construction period.

In collaboration with our operating partner Hornblower we are pleased to be working with Incat Crowther and the shipyards to construct the first vessels of our CTV fleet in the US. These three CTVs represent the first wave of our fleet which we have been developing since 2019 with our Euorpean partners, said Bradley Neuberth, Managing Partner of WINDEA CTV LLC and owner of MidOcean Wind.

The 806 MW Vineyard Wind I offshore wind farm, developed by a joint venture between Iberdrola-owned Avangrid Renewables and Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners (CIP),entered constructionin November 2021.

The wind farm, located 15 miles (some 24 kilometres) off the coast of Marthas Vineyard in Massachusetts, will feature 62 GE Haliade-X 13 MW turbines and is expected to deliver its first power to the grid in 2023.

WINDEA CTV is part of the WINDEA Offshore USA consortium that provides a full set of services for construction support and operations and maintenance (O&M) activities.

The companys fleet is owned and operated by MidOcean Wind LLC and Hornblower Wind, LLC., with technical and operational support from WINDEA Offshore shareholder Ems Maritime Offshore GmbH.

Follow offshoreWIND.biz on:

Read this article:

WINDEA CTV Begins Construction of Three CTVs for US Offshore Wind Market - Offshore WIND